Chapter 5-Discussion, Recommendations and Conclusion
5.1 Discussion of findings
The three research questions informing the study. The questions were arose from a personal interest as a male foundation phase teacher, the primary objective being to discover how male teachers, specifically in-service teachers, construct and negotiate their identities in spaces that were traditionally set aside for females. The focus was on teachers teaching in the Mpumalanga province. The findings responded to the three research questions as outlined below.
Question 1:How do foundation phase male teachers in Mpumalanga schools construct their gender and professional identities?
The findings of the study suggest that male teachers in the context of the Mpumalanga province construct their identities by seeking to position themselves as parents and fathers. The participants constructed themselves in this way as they thought that a man in the foundation phase provides what they called the ‘fatherly touch’, particularly in the phase that was regarded by the participants and their communities as dominated by females. The “parent identity”
appeared to have been adopted by all the participants even though the majority of them did not have children of their own. Those who did have children often compared what they did in the
73
phase with their own homes. This is not an altogether new finding. Studies in South Africa, (Mashiya, 2015; Mashiya et al., 2015), although in the context of pre-service teachers, note that male foundation phase teachers often play fatherly roles in class, noting that the high number of homes headed by mothers necessitates the presence of male teachers in the foundation phase. In this study, the findings also revealed that male teachers construct their identities as role models. They noted that they were role models mainly to boys who might find it difficult to speak to a female teacher about issues affecting them as boys. This was despite the fact that these were very young learners who often were only recently socialised into gender roles. It was clear that men in the foundation phase were uncomfortable when a female learner approached them for assistance; their role modelling discourse applied evidently only to boys.
An important finding in this study concerns the ways in which the male foundation phase teachers sought to distance themselves from emotional work. Any engagement with the roles traditionally associated with women such as care, cleaning and dishing food up was either delegated to children in the class or was redirected to female teachers. This suggests that men constructed their identities drawing largely on social norms in terms of what it means to be a male and what it means to be a female. Connell (2005) argues that masculinities are drawn from cultural practices and norms. This became evident in this study. What was even more intriguing was the ways in which women sought to reinforce social gender regimes and structures within the school setting, with questions being posed about the male teachers’
masculinities and sexualities. This resonates with the ways in which patriarchy is internalised in these contexts.
Interestingly, the participants strategically sought to position themselves as more successful sports or physical education personnel in their respective schools. As Kidd (2013) argues, sports is one of the key mechanisms through which men seek to claim their manhood. The participants considered themselves as active, innovative and creative in initiating improved and more interesting physical education games and lessons in the schools, compared to those of the female teachers who they positioned as old. The participants argued that they excelled in sports because of their gender. This is consistent with a study conducted by Mashiya (2015), focusing on pre-service teachers in South Africa, which found that during teaching practices, male teachers were seen to be active in sporting activities, which suggest a positioning of being a better sports teacher.
74
Alongside the positioning as a parent, findings suggest that teachers constructed themselves as
‘professionals’ and ‘normal’. The identities of being a parent and a professional were common amongst all the participants’ responses. Sumsion (2000) in a study that focused on how male teachers construct and negotiate their identities, found that men in the foundation phase believe having a higher degree or being more knowledgeable in the school will increase their professional and personal power within the space perceived as female dominated. In this study it was found that participants constructed their identities on the basis of being knowledgeable and more qualified to be in the foundation phase, which is similar to the above study.
Another finding that emerged from this study were the ways in which the men sought to invert the negativity associated with male teachers teaching in the foundation phase by positioning themselves as pioneers, leaders and role models who are there in the schools to make a change in the teaching space. The identity of being a pioneer was a result of those who were part of the Mpumalanga government cohort, as they noted that they want to be the best in the phase and setting an example to other male teachers in the province. Connell (2005) noted that masculinities are hierarchical, such that within a group of men, some often position themselves as powerful and leaders.
The above points suggest that male teachers construct their identities on the basis of existing social norms. While they are aware of the challenges presented by being a male in the foundation phase, they use several strategies to invert these challenges in order to appeal to traditionally accepted forms of masculinity. The discussion will now turn to address the second research question explored in this study.
Question 2: Why do foundation phase male teachers in Mpumalanga schools construct their identities in the ways they do?
As already established above, the driving reasons for constructions of identities that male teachers adopt concerns the ever-present patriarchal and heteronormative cultures that exist in the context. The findings show that male teachers construct their identities around being a parent and being professional mainly because they do not want to be undermined because of their gender in this phase. By appealing to professionalism and parenting, the teachers tried to gain the respect of their learners, colleagues and communities. This is consistent with Tennhoff et al. (2015) who find that in Switzerland male teachers identify themselves as professionals because they do not want their gender to be compared with femininity. Taking the positioning of being a parent, professional and “normal”, it is argued that, was a strategy to avoid being
75
associated with female roles and being called names such as ‘Mam Tom” (Madam Tom). In addition, findings have shown that the gender and sexuality of the participants was policed, and it is such policing that often led to the positioning adopted by the participants.
Further, as argued above, they construct their identities as superior and knowledgeable compared to female teachers because of their societal position as men. Connell (2005) states that masculinities are multiple, constructed, historical and hierarchical, here the men position themselves as role models mainly to boys in the foundation phase. This suggests a paranoia that men have towards everything that is considered feminine by the society and a perception that it will make boys effeminate boys and ruin the male privilege that exists in the society.
Being a role model to boys appears to be a way in which they can maintain the historical dominance of men over women and other subordinate men, even in spaces where women dominate. Martino and Rezai-Rashti (2012a) note that there exists a gender regime that continuously supports the hegemonic practices of men. Therefore, the performative (Butler, 1999) construction of the men was mainly a tool to reinforce patriarchy.
Comments and statements made by the curriculum implementers and parents about men in comparison to women is also a way in which hegemonic masculinity is reinforced in the foundation phase. It is also the reason why the participants constructed themselves as pioneers, difference makers and better disciplinarians, in comparison to women who were perceived as incompetent in delivering pedagogical content, administering sports and physical education activities as well as instilling discipline to learners. As Hjalmarsson and Löfdahl (2014) show in a study conducted in Sweden, how men who exhibit hegemonic masculinity are often perceived as real professionals while those who exhibit something different are not valued and are often regarded as feminine. Males in the foundation phase in this study, within the context of the Mpumalanga province, construct their identities in the way they do because they think they are a solution for gender equity and because they believe that they are role models to boys.
In the next question findings on how they negotiate their identities are discussed.
Question 3: How do foundation phase teachers negotiate their identities in professional teaching contexts in Mpumalanga?
Common to all the participants who were interviewed in the study, is the fact that that they negotiated their identities through working hard and aiming to prove a point that even men can teach in the foundation phase. Out of the nine participants one indicated that he views the foundation phase male teachers in the same way he views male nurses, especially since his
76
father was a male nurse. Identity in this way is negotiated through following exemplary masculinity, that if his father was able to do the work associated with females he too can do it.
Findings revealed that there exists a gender labour divide within the foundation phase, including early childhood development. One participant out of the nine that were interviewed, teaches in Grade R, and the other eight argued that Grade R was more appropriate for females because learners require more attention and patience, and are not used to formal schooling at that level. A study conducted by Bhana and Moosa (2015) in South Africa, focusing on male pre-service teachers, found that within the phases of schooling, the foundation phase is regarded as having a low status and people who get in are considered as stepping down while men are perceived as effeminate. Therefore within the context of foundation phase which is considered as stepping down and feminine, the majority of the male teachers in this study teach in the senior grades of the foundation phase. Findings suggest that male teachers find Grade 2 and Grade 3 more interesting and more suitable for men. This was because they assume that in Grade R learners are still crying and often still wet themselves. This is thus associated with femininity as a certain degree of maternal care is required. The participant in Grade R often requests female colleagues to assist when confronted with a child who has accidentally wet his/her pants. This is an indication that the division of labour is done purely in gendered terms.
Amongst the participants there were a variety of ways in which they negotiated their identities such as those participants switched roles with female teachers and performed those roles that were considered as ”fatherly”. This mainly was about providing guidance and engaging in sporting activities. Findings have shown that men are aware that they are perceived as superior and strong, and that they should not cry at school, especially in front of the learners. Other participants use the constructs of being a parent or teacher to negotiate their gender identities in responding to duties that are constructed as feminine. It was clear that the teachers policed their actions by ensuring that they did not engage in activities that would have positioned them as child molesters. For example, they talked to a female learner in the presence of other learners as a way of ensuring that they were not seen as paedophiles. Interestingly, in this context, the paedophilia was not so much concerned with the same-sex as opposed to the opposite sex. This is mainly due to the teacher’s own positioning as heterosexual males in a context that only supports heteronormativity. In Australia it was found that male teachers regard the ‘parent’
identity as an advantage, because to the society it legitimatises their involvement in the foundation phase, especially noting the high suspicion of child sexual abuse (Sumsion, 2000).
Furthermore Sumsion (2000) found that men in Australia usually locate themselves within the
77
“socially authorised” constructions of being a man in order to hide or minimise their otherness.
Recommendations are presented which are structured as a form of implications.